Journal of Emerging Trends in Educational Research and Policy Studies (JETERAPS) 4(3): 413-423 Journal of Emerging Trends in Educational

Research and Policy Studies (JETERAPS) 4(3):413-423 (ISSN:2141-6990) Scholarlink Research Institute Journals, 2013 (ISSN: 2141-6990) jeteraps.scholarlinkresearch.org

Adequate and Inadequate Communicational Contexts for the Inclusion of Visually Impaired Students in Electromagnetism Classes
1

Eder Pires de Camargo, 2Roberto Nardi, 2Edval Rodrigues de Viveiros and 3 Estfano Vizconde Veraszto
1

Department of Physics and Chemistry, Faculty of Engineering, So Paulo State University UNESP, Ilha Solteira/SP. Graduate Program in Science Education (Area of Concentration: Teaching Science). Faculty of Sciences, So Paulo State University UNESP, Bauru/SP. 2 So Paulo State University UNESP, Bauru School of Science, Department of Education. 2 PhD in So Paulo State University UNESP, Bauru School of Science, Department of Education. 3 Professor at the Federal University of So Carlos. Department of Natural Sciences, Mathematics and Education. UFSCar/CCA/DCNME, Campus Araras, So Paulo, Brasil. Corresponding Author: Eder Pires de Camargo
_______________________________________________________________________________________ Abstract The physics teaching often uses analogies, metaphors, didactic transpositions and other resources that make use of a semiotic language based on models and audio-visual strategies. The effectiveness of learning using strictly this approach has been questioned by several authors, considering both sighted students as visually impaired students. The research analyzed students with disabilities in electromagnetism classes, evaluating the relationship between the languages used and the communicative contexts. As a result, we find be necessary for physics teaching to use other language categories with varying combinations of sensory-perceptual modalities. We demonstrated that didactic strategies such as " tactile-auditory" favor conceptual learning in comparison with activities such as "audio-visual", leading to segregational and authoritory contexts. Moreover, the study concluded that those same strategies should be used simultaneously for seeing students. Thus, the visually impaired students would not be treated in a manner segregated __________________________________________________________________________________________ Keywords: electromagnetism teaching; visual impairment; communicational context; special education needs. _________________________________________________________________________________________ disabled students in regular schools, the adaptation of INTRODUCTION In Brazil, the educational integration of persons with that school to the needs of all its participants, and disabilities (visual, auditory, physical and adaptation, by providing conditions for students with intellectual) has increased, hence mobilizing the disabilities in the classroom context. It involves a physical bases as well as the attitudes. However, this bilateral adequacy relationship between the insertion alone does not guarantee the inclusion of educational environment and students with these students, which produces discontent and crises. disabilities, in which the first generates, mobilizes Notwithstanding, this situation has a positive side, for and directs the conditions for the effective it seeks alternatives to the social adequacy of the new participation of the latter. In the logic of inclusion, school reality. On the other hand, the crisis that sets individual differences are acknowledged and in should not be analyzed unilaterally, that is, accepted and are the basis for building an innovative investments are needed in the research areas, in pedagogical approach. In this new approach there is teacher training and in accessibility. Characterizing no room for exclusion or segregation and all students, school as a social space, guided by respect and the with and without disabilities, participate fully. right to expression by multiple differences, is no more than acknowledging human ontology, hence its Effective participation is understood as the formation structuring on this. Inclusion is positioned in a of a particular school activity that gives students with manner contrary to the movements of disabilities all-inclusive conditions. Therefore, this homogenization and standardization. It defends the can, in addition to clarifying the real educational right to difference and diversity. It is put into effect needs of students with disabilities, serve as a baseline through three general principles: the presence of on the occurrence or not of inclusion.

413

Journal of Emerging Trends in Educational Research and Policy Studies (JETERAPS) 4(3):413-423 (ISSN:2141-6990) The understanding of inclusion, for effective participation, makes it objective, shows the real difficulties and viabilities found by teachers and students, and explains specific variables related to the educational phenomenon and the characteristics of disability. One of these variables relates to communication in Physics classes that includes the presence of visually impaired students, given that a science classroom can and should be considered as an environment to discuss/share meanings. According to Geraldi (1998), it is the importance of communication processes among the participants in a teaching/learning episode that produces more efficient students, that is, they learned the studied contents more significantly. Following this line of thought, we conclude that the construction of scientific meanings receives the influence of communication structure and context in which a particular language is used. This implies that the communication relationship between teachers and students developed in the classroom are crucial for the emergence and consolidation of teaching/learning processes that would otherwise not occur. We prepared the research in the physics/science teaching area for blind or low vision students, summarizing the following theoretical approaches. Probably, the first studies on science teaching for visually impaired students were published by the AAIB (American Association of Instructors of the Blind), especially in its 1871 annals. There is a North American publication on the state of the art in the Science Education area for students with disabilities (Davies, 1994) with more than 1,000 references from the 1920s. Among these are investigations such as the one by Henderson, (1965), who addressed the physics laboratory for blind students, Beck-Winchatz, Ostro (2003), Grady et al. (2003), and Gardner (1996) which emphasized the use of resources and specific or adapted teaching materials, as well as different strategies for teaching science and mathematics to visually impaired students, Schleppenbach (1996), Kucera (1996), Kumar et al., (2001), which address guidelines using information technology, computers, calculators and the Braille system for the students in question. In The Physics Teacher, we find articles related to Physics Teaching for visually impaired students (Baughman, Zollman, 1977; Rossing, 1977; Weems, 1977; Parry, et al., 1997; Windelborn, 1999). Some of these bibliographies are part of a dossier entitled Resource Letter EPGA-1: The education of physics graduate assistants, published by the American Association of Physics Teachers, whose goal is to offer guidance for physics teachers who teach visually impaired students (Jossem, 2000). A literature review in five major journals in this specific area of Science Education (International Journal of Science Education, Studies in Science Education, Science and Education, Physics Education e Enseanza de las Ciencias) conducted between 2000 and 2010, showed a total of four articles on the subject discussed herein (Rule et al., 2010; Ramadas, 2009; Padilla, 2009; Camargo et al., 2007). This demonstrates that the recent research focus on science teaching is focused on other areas of interest, as necessary as teaching physics to blind and low vision students. In Brazil, studies on physics education for visually impaired students have been conducted over the last ten years (These studies focused on the issue of alternative conceptions of blind people from birth and the preparation and coordination of activities for the visually impaired students. The results indicated the non-visual perception potential for the construction of knowledge in physics, as well as a model for the teachers performance with visually impaired students. Besides the theoretical framework presented, institutional and non-governmental initiatives have been adopted in several countries, trying to reach a very diverse spectrum of people with all types of disabilities. This includes guidance and specific works on university and pre-university education carried out in nearly every country in the world, and by UNESCO and the World Health Organization. There is, for example, the Scottish institutional program subsidized by the Scottish Funding Council, which conveys a national accessibility project through the University of Strathclyde, called Teachability Project. A significant part of the aforementioned studies and initiatives implicitly address the inclusion of blind and low vision students in physics classes. They emphasize the creation of methodologies and materials for these students education. Therefore, since 2005, we have performed in Brazil an investigation that seeks to understand which are the inclusion barriers visually impaired students face in physics classes. The thematic reported here is particularly important in Brazil, which has, through legislation, guidelines and directives, followed the international trend of educational services for students with disabilities through the inclusion process (UNESCO, 1994). It can also assist to understand this process by presenting results related to the particular characteristics of the Brazilian reality, the type of disability (visual) and areas of scientific knowledge (physics). Thus, we aimed to answer the following question: what communicative contexts and language profiles favor and what hinder the communication of the topic electromagnetism for students with visual impairments?

414

Journal of Emerging Trends in Educational Research and Policy Studies (JETERAPS) 4(3):413-423 (ISSN:2141-6990) The Activities of Electromagnetism This article is part of a long-term study conducted between 2005 and 2010. The purpose of this study is to understand the process of inclusion of visually impaired students in physics classes. The first part of the investigation, which began in 2005, focused on the analysis of lesson plans developed by undergraduate physics students. The second part, begun in 2006, analyzed the implementation of activities in the physics learning environment that included the presence of students with and without visual impairment. The research procedures followed these steps: (a) monitoring and recording the entire planning process and the implementation of activities in physics teaching in an educational environment that included the presence of students with and without visual impairment (2005). This process will be detailed to follow; (b) transcription of activities 80 hours of recordings (2006); (c) development of analysis categories for understanding the educational process in question (2006); (d) analysis of teaching modules (2007 to 2010). Moreover, the data analyzed here were organized in a course called The Other Side of physics offered in 2005 by undergraduate students of So Paulo State University UNESP Bauru campus, a Brazilian city in the state of So Paulo. This course was part of the undergraduate students course and was composed of modules that addressed the following topics: optics, electromagnetism, mechanics, thermology and modern physics. The modules comprised 4 individual activities of 4 hours. The organization to implement the activities occurred in two stages, the preparation time and the defining moment of the educational environment. The preparation time was characterized by two basic activities performed in the first half of 2005: modules planning and teaching materials, and reflective discussion pertaining to issues related to teaching physics and visual impairment. At the beginning of the first semester, in the undergraduate course Physics teaching practices, the undergraduates were randomly divided into five groups according to the physics themes mentioned earlier (modules planning and teaching materials). Once the groups were defined, they received the following educational problem: You should prepare a short 16-hour course on the theme chosen by your group, and the physics teaching activities of the mini-course should be suited to the education of students with and without visual impairments. In the following meetings (reflective discussion), topics related to physics teaching and visual impairment were discussed (Camargo, 2000, 2005). There were two discussion coordinators: (a) a teacher responsible for undergraduate teaching (second author of this paper) and (b) a researcher (first author of this paper). It should be noted that the coordinator (b) has experience with the topic of teaching physics to the visually impaired for the following reasons: (1) he is blind and is a physics teacher. This bestows him practical experience as a visually impaired student and as a visually impaired physics teacher; (2) his master's and doctorate research focused on the subject focused herein. The undergraduate students determined that the activities would be an extension course to be offered by UNESP for a public high school in Bauru (school 1). The choice of school 1 was due to four factors: (a) This school is associated to UNESP; (b) A good relationship between the school and UNESP; (c) Similar courses have already been successfully applied in this institution; (d) Proximity between school and UNESP. This proximity facilitated the students journey. Once the agreement was signed with this school, the second stage began. At the beginning of the second semester of 2005, the undergraduate students began a dissemination stage for the students of school 1. The number of vacancies for student participation was thirty-five, and the number of those who registered was of approximately seventy students. The thirty-five students of school 1 were randomly chosen. Parallel to the dissemination process described, we contacted another public school in Bauru to invite students with visual impairments to participate in the aforementioned course (school 2). This new school was contacted because at the school there were no visually impaired students enrolled. School 2 has a teaching room that meets the educational needs of visually impaired students in the region of Bauru (e.g., teaching of Braille, transcribing texts or exams into Braille). Two visually impaired students were interested in participating in the course. One student was born blind and the other one lost his vision over time. We clarify that these students were studying in different schools. School 2 offered them a support educational service, not a substitute for regular education. The electromagnetism group was composed of four undergraduate students who alternated between the roles of coordination and support activities. With the procedures described, a learning environment similar to a regular room was set up. In this environment, the undergraduate students performed their course program addressing the theme of inclusion.

415

Journal of Emerging Trends in Educational Research and Policy Studies (JETERAPS) 4(3):413-423 (ISSN:2141-6990) ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY The audio-visual recording and the full transcript of the activities comprised the analysis corpus with the following procedures: exploring the material; processing and interpretation of results to conduct a thematic analysis - content analysis technique (Bardin, 1977) which enabled us to identify the feasibility and difficulties of communication between the teachers and the visually impaired students. The evaluation of communication feasibility or difficulty was guided by the visually impaired students access to the information conveyed in the classroom. The accessibility, in turn, took into account the language characteristics of the students visual history, in other words, if he was born blind or lost his vision over time. In the process of exploring the material, we performed the fragmentation of corpus analysis (Bardin). For fragmentation, we enclosed passages containing the undergraduate and students with and without visual impairment speech characterized by the same language and the same communicative context. After fragmentation, we organized two types of groups: (a) of the passages that contained similar language, and (b) passages characterized by the same communicative context. With the grouping (a), it was possible to identify the language that generated communication feasibilities and difficulties, and with group (b), the identification of communicative contexts. Once the languages and contexts were explained, we established relationships between these variables in order to understand the contextual frequency of a given communication feasibility or difficulty. These will be presented in the data analysis. Because the maximum dimensions allowed for submission of articles in this journal, the results emphasize the communication feasibilities and difficulties experienced only by the student who was born blind (identified in the text as a student "B"). The results of the analysis of the student "A" will be addressed elsewhere. Criteria to Characterize the Linguistic Profile Identifying the characteristics of a given language was based on two structures: empirical and semanticsensorial. The empirical structure refers to the way in which specific information is materialized, stored, transmitted and perceived. It is organized according to basic sensorial and mixed codes, where the first ones represent unitary or independent codes (visual, auditory, tactile, etc.), and second ones, interdependent codes (audio-visual, tactile-auditory, etc.). The sensory-semantic structure refers to the effects produced by the sensory perceptions in the meaning of phenomena, concepts, objects, situations and contexts. These effects are understood by four associative references between meaning and sensory perception: inseparable, association, unrelated and secondary related. Inseparable meanings are those whose mental representation is dependent on a specific sensory perception. These meanings can never be represented internally by different sensory perceptions from those that constitute them. Associated meanings are those whose mental representation is not exclusively dependent on the sensory perceptions used to register or describe them. They will always be represented through different sensory perceptions than the first ones. Unrelated sensory meanings (or without sensory relationship) have no connection or association with any sensory perception. While the learner may construct sensory mental representations about ideas with the characteristic, they never actually correspond to the phenomena/concepts intended to be communicated. The mental representations with the semantic-sensory feature discussed here will always be in the analog, metaphorical and artificial level. These are abstract meanings referring to the hypothetical constructs prepared to explain the phenomena, effects, properties, etc. Secondary related sensory meanings (or secondary sensory relationship) are those whose understanding establishes a non-priority relationship with the sensory element. In other words, although there are mental representations of sensory constructions by the learner, they do not represent a prerequisite to understanding the phenomenon/concept that is addressed. Thus, the characterization of languages obeys the relationship: Language = (empirical structure) + (semantic-sensory structure). The evaluation of a feasibility or communication difficulty took into account the fact that a given language made available, or not, the meanings it transmitted to student (B). In other words, accessibility was evaluated due to the communicative potential of the languages empirical and semanticsensory structures, compared with the visual characteristic of the student (blind at birth). Next, we elucidate, respectively, the languages that generate difficulty and communication feasibility. Profile of Languages Generating Communication Difficulty and Feasibility Languages generating difficulties We identified 92 communication difficulties among the undergraduate students and student (B), which were grouped in four different linguistic profiles. These profiles comprised the following empirical structures: (a) basic structure: independent auditory and visual; and (b) mixed structures: interdependent

416

Journal of Emerging Trends in Educational Research and Policy Studies (JETERAPS) 4(3):413-423 (ISSN:2141-6990) audio-visual and interdependent tactile-auditory. The characteristics of such structures are described next. Independent auditory and visual. Is characterized by the independence between the auditory and visual codes that serve as support material. This takes place, for example, when the same information is projected and spoken. Therefore, the level of oral detail determines quality standards of accessibility to the information transmitted. Interdependent audio-visual. Is characterized by mutual dependency between the auditory and visual codes that provide material support to the information transmitted. From an empirical point of view, access to languages with this feature can only be achieved through the simultaneous observation of the codes mentioned, since the partial observation of one of the codes does not undo the interdependence of its material support. Interdependent tactile-auditory. Is characterized by mutual dependency between the tactile and auditory codes that provide material support to the transmission of information. From the empirical point of view, access to languages with this feature can only be achieved through the simultaneous observation of the codes mentioned, since the partial observation of one of the codes does not undo the interdependence of its material support. Regarding the semantic-sensory aspect, the electromagnetic meanings addressed were related to two structures: a) Meaning associated to visual representations. Examples: (1) visual records of the electrification processes (contact and induction), electric field energy lines, visual record of resistor, electric generator and receiver and magnetic dipole, visual records of magnetic field line (magnets, the Earth, etc.); (2): mathematical formalism for the treatment of electric and magnetic phenomena. Examples: Coulombs law, electric current, the second law of Ohm, scientific notation, record of the units of magnitudes, equation and graph of the electric generator and receiver (development of problems involving calculations); and (3) use and reading of values in measurement instruments (Galvanometer, Voltmeter and Ammeter); b) Meaning of inseparable visual representations: Examples: visual characteristic of colors associated with the phenomenon of aurora and australis borealis and visual idea of light energy. Next, we explain the languages generating communication difficulties, examples and number of sentences by the undergraduate students. Interdependent audio-visual/meaning associated to visual representations (89 problems). Example: If I have q1 and q2, I have a distance; if I raise it here, it has to decrease there. This here number is much higher, this division will then be much lower. Interdependent Audio-visual/inseparable meaning of visual representations (1 difficulty) Example: The solar wind hits the magnetic field lines on earth, and this interaction causes the occurrence of auroras, and when they this, they release energy. This energy is released as light in colors of green or pink, green for oxygen and pink for nitrogen. Independent visual and auditory/visual representations associated to meanings (1 difficulty). Example: In metals resistivity ranges from 1.72 times ten to less than eight times hom meters to 5.51 times ten to less than eight; in the semi-conductor 3.5 times ten to five, 2.3 times ten to less than six, in insulating materials, approximately ten elevated to twelve, then the difference is very high. Interdependent tactile-auditory/inseparable meaning of visual representations (1 difficulty). Example: This lamp, subjected to a voltage of 110 volts, will have electric current passing through it, will also convert electrical energy into light energy (lit lamp is brought close to student B, but does not touch it) The transmission of associated and inseparable meanings of visual representations was the basis for communication difficulties between the undergraduate students and student (B). These difficulties, through empirical language structures, were intended for visually dependent access (interdependent audio-visual) and visually independent access (interdependent tactile-auditory and independent auditory and visual). Thus, difficulties caused by visually dependent language access are based on the empirical structure and, on the semantic-sensory structure of the meanings discussed (mostly meanings related to visual representations). The difficulties generated by visually independent language access are based on the semantic-sensory structure of the meanings discussed (inseparable meaning and linked to visual representations). Languages made up of interdependent audio-visual empirical structure represent the main communication barrier between the undergraduate students and student (B), by the number of times they were identified (around 98%), as well as by the way they organized the transmission of meanings (simultaneous observation of auditory and visual codes that give material support to the information transmission).

417

Journal of Emerging Trends in Educational Research and Policy Studies (JETERAPS) 4(3):413-423 (ISSN:2141-6990) Languages that generate feasibility We identified 122 communication feasibilities between the undergraduate students and student (B). These feasibilities were grouped according to 10 linguistic profiles (10 languages accessible to the students). The accessible languages were based on the following empirical structures: (a) Fundamental structures: basic auditory and visual and independent auditory, and (b) Mixed structure: interdependent tactile-auditory. The characteristics of the fundamental auditory structure are presented next. The characteristics of the auditory empirical structures and independent visual and interdependent tactile-auditory were presented earlier. Basic auditory. Is characterized by having only sound codes. Access to languages with this empirical structure takes place through auditory observation of the codes mentioned (single support material). Regarding the semantic-sensory aspect, the meanings conveyed by the accessible language were related to four structures. a) Meaning associated to non-visual representations: Examples: the process of electrification by friction, electric field energy lines, symbolism of the elements of a given electrical circuit, crystal structure of a conductor, position of electrons, protons and neutrons in the atom, analogic tactile-descriptive structure of Ohm's second law (conductor area, conductor length and conductor resistivity), analogy of the ideas of potential difference, electrical current and electrical resistance, magnetic field lines, etc. The transmission of meanings for those elements mentioned took place through mockups or equipment that could be touched, handled and aurally observed. Such mockups and equipment were built by the undergraduate students. b) Meaning of secondary sensory relation Examples: danger of lightning, purpose and operation of a lightning rod, ray effects on electrical appliances, construction and operation of the Faraday cage, operation of a receiver, discovery date of amber, construction date of electrification equipment, origin of the capacitor, name of who discovered the lighting rod, date of Coulombs law, date and creator of the battery, strongest developmental period of electricity, electrical components and the electrostatic studies, the function of the electroscope, etc; c) Inseparable meaning of non-visual representations - Examples: electric current heats the shower, electric current produces shock, in any receiver there is energy loss in the form of thermal energy, 90% of the electricity in a lamp is transformed into heat energy, electric current heats the wire conductor, electric current heats the lamp, texture and hardness of a HD magnet, etc; d) Meaning without sensory relationship - Examples: proton/positive charge, electron/negative charge, neutron/neutral charge, what is magnetic field, what is electric field, the purpose of the capacitor is to store electrical energy, difference between positive and negative electricity, electric current produces a magnetic field, meaning of electricity. Next, we explain the languages that generate communication feasibilities, examples of the undergraduate students sentences and the frequency they were used. Basic auditory/meaning of secondary sensory relationship (27 feasibilities). Example: Science is not complete, nor is Einsteins theory true. As scientists say, there is not one truth but truths; one theory complements another. Interdependent tactile-auditory/meaning linked to non-visual representations (26 feasibilities). Example: In your left hand, if you continue to the left across these triangles here, its representation is the negative charge that is in your right hand; this is the positive one, you will notice that parts of these wires are not smooth, in fact some will have little arrows that were hung around those wires that are showing direction. In this case, you will observe that it indicates that the line of the electric field always leaves the positive charge to go to the negative one. Independent auditory and visual/meaning of secondary sensory relationship (24 feasibilities). Example: The first reports on electricity were at around 640 BC with Thales of Miletus. What did Thales of Miletus do at this time? He discovered the property of amber. Basic auditory/meaning linked to non-visual representations (17 feasibilities). Example: Imagine two positively charged spheres: positive spheres repel, one then goes to one side and the other goes to the other side, to opposite sides, lets assume that one goes to your right and another goes to your left. Independent auditory and visual/meaning linked to non-visual representations (10 survivals). Example: Andrew Marri Amper observed that a wire carrying electric current shows a certain movement when it is in a magnetic field. Interdependent tactile-auditory/inseparable meaning of non-visual representations (5 feasibilities). Example: These electrons tend to all go in one direction, but they clash with these balls representing the atoms, and the shock they have with the atoms causes them to heat, each atom heats up. Independent auditory and visual/meaning has no sensory relationship (5 feasibilities).

418

Journal of Emerging Trends in Educational Research and Policy Studies (JETERAPS) 4(3):413-423 (ISSN:2141-6990) Example: In the first half of the nineteenth century, it was proved that electric current produces a magnetic field. Basic auditory/inseparable meaning of non-visual representations (4 feasibilities). Example: An example of the effects of current is the shower device that heats the water. Basic auditory/meaning without sensory relationship (3 feasibilities). Example: According to Faraday, the magnetic field is an area in which there is a magnetic interaction between two objects that have magnetic properties. The idea of a magnetic field is complicated because the field is not a tactile thing, you cannot touch it, you cannot feel it, you cannot see it, it is something that is dispersed in the air, is not something with which you can have direct contact. Interdependent tactile-auditory/secondary sensory relationship meaning (1 feasibility). Example: This that your hand is touching is a voltmeter (undergraduates hand leading Student B). It measures the voltage and measures the current depending on how you hold the button. For the undergraduate students and student (B), there was the transmission of associated and inseparable meanings of non-visual representations, as well as unrelated sensory and secondary sensory relationship. This transmission was through languages comprising empirical structures of visually independent access, namely: basic auditory, independent auditory and visual and interdependent tactile-auditory. Next, we analyze the accessible and inaccessible languages in the communicational context in which they were employed. Communicational context Once the suitable and unsuitable languages were identified and characterized, we worked towards understanding in which communicative contexts these languages were used. We defined the communicational context based on two variables: time of activity and standard discourse. In other words, to determine the communicational context, two categories will be related, that is, the visually impaired students participation in the activities (time category), as well as the discursive characteristic established on these occasions (standard discourse category). Analysis Categories Category 1 (time). This concerns the instructional space determined by the undergraduate students to organize the presence of the visually impaired student. These were two spaces: for the episodes, and the particular episodes. a) Episodes: This concerns the common teaching spaces for students with and without visual impairment, in other words, the times in which all students were engaged in the same tasks coordinated by the undergraduate students. A key feature of the episodes is not differentiating the contents, methodological strategy and instructional resources for students with and without visual impairments. b) Particular episodes: This relates to the teaching space that only had the presence of student (B), That is, it took place separately and concurrently with the classes for students without visual impairments. The central feature of these episodes is the differentiation of the teaching resources used, the methodological strategies employed and the content or its approach, when compared to the participation of students without visual impairments. Category 2 (Standard discourse). This category is based on the ideas of Mortimer and Scott (2002), and will be used as theoretical reference in the interpretation of the standard discourse of the group activities in electromagnetism. This characterizes the interactive relationships between the undergraduate students and students. This characterization will be done according to two discursive dimensions; interactive or non-interactive discourse, and dialogical or authority discourse. The difference between the interactive and noninteractive discourse is by identifying the number of voices participating in a particular discursive event. Thus, Mortimer and Scott (op. cit.) defined as interactive discourse that which has the participation of more than one person, and non-interactive discourse as that which occurs with the participation of only one person. For example: if in a class only the teacher speaks, the discourse is not interactive, while if during class there is student participation (doubts, questions, etc.), the discourse is interactive. The differences between dialogic and authoritative discourse takes place considering one or more discursive contents. As indicated by Mortimer and Scott (op. cit.), if more than one voice is considered, the discursive standard is dialogical, while if only one voice is heard and accepted, the standard discourse is of authority. In other words, in dialogic discourse, various types of opinions or viewpoints are accepted, and in the discourse of authority, just one opinion or viewpoint is taken into account. With the relationships in the dimensions described, Mortimer and Scott (op. cit.) defined four patterns that characterize the discursive interactions between teachers and students in the science classroom. These standards are:

419

Journal of Emerging Trends in Educational Research and Policy Studies (JETERAPS) 4(3):413-423 (ISSN:2141-6990) a) Interactive/dialogic: the exploration of different ideas, points of views, issues, questions, etc. This kind of discursive standard is based on dialogic argumentation, whose characteristics are as follows: (a) the occurrence of sharing ideas (students/students and students/teacher); (b) clashes of ideas among class participants; (c) active participation of students in the discussion process through the explanation of ideas, conclusions and internal conflicts. b) Non-interactive/dialogic: reconsideration of teachers regarding different viewpoints, highlighting similarities and differences of the students ideas. In an argumentative dialogue, a teachers role is to mediate the students ideas. This mediation can take place through a non-interactive/dialogic discourse, in which the teacher takes on the role of organizing the ideas discussed by combining the similar and different points of views. c) Interactive/authoritative: in order to achieve a predetermined goal, the teacher guides the students through a set of questions and answers. This standard discourse is based on a Socratic argumentative profile, whose characteristics are as follows: in a Socratic argument, the teacher has the role of conducting the scientifically accepted ideas, using constant reformulations of questions until the students have the desired response. d) Non-interactive/authority: the teacher presents a particular viewpoint without hearing the students views. This type of standard discourse is characterized by a rhetorical argument, because the teacher has the role of convincingly transmitting contents. With the categories presented, the communication context is defined by the relationship: (Time) + (Standard discursive) Next, we explain and analyze the relationship between communicational context and suitable and unsuitable languages. This is to understand which are the communicational contexts that favor and hinder the use of accessible languages to visually impaired students. viability, there were 122 (10 profiles linguistic) a total of 214 occurrences of difficulty/ feasibility. Next, we explain the relationships: communication context/language generating difficulty and communication context/language generating feasibility. Communication context/language generating difficulties Table 1 shows the relationship between the communicational context and the language generating difficulty, as well as the quantitative impact of this relationship. The communicative contexts and languages are shown in a decreasing sequence of occurrence. Table 1 indicates that the linguistic profile generating difficulty was more common in certain communication contexts. This analysis emphasizes the communication context/inaccessible language relationship for the student blind at birth. These numbers indicate eight important characteristics of the communication difficulties: a) a majoritarian presence of difficulties related to the interdependent empirical audio-visual structure; b) a majoritarian presence of difficulties associated to the meanings related to visual representations; c) the difficulties from the interdependent audiovisual empirical structure were practically entirely related to the meanings associated to the visual representations; d) the inseparable meanings of visual representations discreetly participated in the set of communication difficulties; e) there were no difficulties in the particular episodes; f) the episodes common to all students were mainly characterized by the use of interdependent audiovisual empirical language structure; g) interactivity proved to be a discreet factor of difficulty; h) there were no relationship difficulties: interactivity/visually independent empirical language structures (interdependent auditory-tactile and independent auditory and visual);

DATA ANALYSIS AND RESULTS Thus, 92 (4 linguistic profiles) communication difficulties were identified for student. As for Table 1. Shows the variables: communication context and inaccessible languages
Communicational context (right) Language (below) Interdependent audio-visual / meaning linked to the visual representations. Interdependent audio-visual / inseparable meaning of visual representations Independent visual and auditory / visual meaning of representations Interdependent tactile-auditory / inseparable meaning of visual representations Frequency/percentage/ vertical noninteractive/ authority episode 85 1 1 1 88/95.65% interactive/a uthority episode 4 0 0 0 4/4.35% Frequency/Per centage horizontal 89/96.74% 1/1.08% 1/1.08% 1/1.08% Total 92/100%

420

Journal of Emerging Trends in Educational Research and Policy Studies (JETERAPS) 4(3):413-423 (ISSN:2141-6990) Communicational context/language generating feasibility Table 2 explains the relationship between communicational context and language generating feasibility, as well as the quantitative impact of this relationship. The communicative contexts and languages are shown in a decreasing sequence of occurrence. Table 2 indicates that the linguistic profile generating feasibility was more common in certain communication contexts. The data indicate ten expressive characteristics of the communication feasibilities for the electromagnetism group: a) Prevalence of viabilities in the communicative contexts common to all students; b) Prevalence in the contexts common to all students, use of empirical structures: basic auditory and independent auditory and visual; c) Prevalence of feasibilities related to the meanings of secondary sensory relationship (factual contents); d) The non-interactive and authority elements were appropriate for the secondary sensory relationship meanings;
Communicational context (right) Language (below) Basic auditory/meaning of secondary sensory relationship Interdependent tactile-auditory/meaning associated to non-visual representations Independent auditory and visual/meaning of secondary sensory relationship Basic auditory/meaning associated to nonvisual representations Independent auditory and visual/meaning associated to non-visual representations Interdependent tactileauditory/inseparable meaning of nonvisual representations Independent auditory and visual/unrelated sensory meaning Basic auditory/inseparable meaning of non-visual representations Basic auditory/unrelated sensory meaning Interdependent tactile-auditory/secondary sensory relationship meaning Frequency/Percentage/Vertical Noninteractive/ authority episode 8 4 23 6 5 1 4 1 2 0 54/44.26%

e) Frequent occurrence of feasibilities related to the meanings of inseparable non-visual representations in episodes characterized by the interactivity element; f) The particular episodes facilitated the use of interdependent tactile-auditory empirical language structures, as well as the meanings related to nonvisual representations; g) Occurrence of viability related to the interdependent auditory-tactile empirical structure in episodes of non-interactive/authority and interactive/authority; h) The occurrence of feasibility related to the electromagnetic meanings without sensory relationship; i) Higher number of feasibilities in interactive communication contexts and/or of authority; j) The occurrence of: feasibility/interdependent audio-visual empirical structure relationship; Table 2. Shows the variables: context and accessible languages. communication

Interactive/ authority episode 15 8 1 7 3 4 1 2 1 0 42/34.43%

Interactive/ authority particular episode 4 11 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 17/13.93%

Interactive/ dialogical episode 0 0 0 4 2 0 0 0 0 0 6/4.92%

Non-interactive/ authority particular episode 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3/2.46%

Frequency/ Percentage/ horizontal 27/22.13% 26/21.31% 24/19.67% 17/13.93% 10/8.20 5/4.10 5/4.10 4/3.28% 3/2.46% 1/0.82% Total 122/100%

Particular episodes: feasibility that generated difficulties at methodological level We now discuss a factor interpreted as a methodological difficulty, in other words, the occurrence of particular episodes during the activities of the electromagnetism group (see feasibility f). Note that that we are not opposed to individualized attention to any students, only that which represents an exclusionary differentiation. Particular episodes result from trying to overcome communication difficulties, therefore, can be seen as a paradoxical question. These difficulties were predominantly found in communicative contexts,

which used an interdependent audio-visual empirical language structure. In other words, when seeking alternatives for the communication problems, the undergraduate student/teachers placed the blind student in a corner of the classroom, separated from the other students. This practice was similar to the main class, characterized by low-voiced dialogues (in whispers), and coordinated by a different teacher than the one ministering the activity to the seeing students. Moreover, during the particular episodes, topics discussed during the class differed from those of all students, which divided the blind students attention with regards to the explanations for the particular environment and the common environmental.

421

Journal of Emerging Trends in Educational Research and Policy Studies (JETERAPS) 4(3):413-423 (ISSN:2141-6990) Therefore, particular episodes comprised segregative learning environments within the classroom and represent a methodological difficulty to be overcome. The individual attention observed in communication contexts, which expected such practice with all the students, was not considered in the particular episodes. DISCUSSION We observed that the difficulties for the effective participation of blind students were predominantly related to the use of interdependent audio-visual empirical language structures in noninteractive/authority contexts. In these environments, inseparable and interrelated meanings and visual representations were related. As an alternative to the difficulties in the context considered, the undergraduate students-teachers conducted individualized and simultaneous attention events, which created a difficult methodological setting, namely the creation of a segregated environment within the classroom. However, the tactile mockups were used in those environments, which established channels of communication between the teacher and blind student (use of interdependent tactile-auditory empirical language structure). However, non-interactive/authority episodes were adequate to transmit secondary sensory relationship meanings, as well as without sensory relationship. In general, these meanings were conveyed by basic auditory and independent visual and auditory empirical language structures. Another important aspect is that the interactive episodes facilitated the transmission of meanings related to non-visual representations, which is a fundamental factor to establish communication channels between the teacher and blind students in electromagnetism activities. This area of physics predominantly deals with meanings of empirically not observable phenomena, and therefore become perceived or represented by records or visual schematics (e.g., electric field energy lines and magnetic field lines). Thus, we observed particular episodes in the activities of the electromagnetism group. In these episodes, there was a predominant use of interdependent tactile-auditory empirical language structure, such a structure is suitable to transmit meanings related to non-visual representations. Moreover, these episodes represent an exclusionary differentiation with regards to the effective participation of blind students in activities. For this reason, it is important to seek electromagnetism activities in communicative contexts that favor individualized attention for all students, with or without visual impairment. In other words, individualized attention to blind students during the main lesson is perceived as inadequate, and furthermore, by a different teacher than the one coordinating that class. In general, in these separate environments, the contents covered differ from those in the classroom and divide the blind students attention. CONCLUSIONS This article presented a study that identified the main barriers visually impaired students face in Physics classes. Was aimed at understand that communication contexts favor and complicate the participation of visually impaired students in electromagnetism activities. Therefore, the study defined, from empirical and semantic-sensorial structures, the languages used in the activities, as well as the moment and the standard discourse these languages were used. With the outcome, it identified a strong relationship between the uses of the interdependent empirical audio-visual language structure in noninteractive episodes of authority, the decreased use of this structure in the interactive episodes, the creation of segregated learning environments within the classroom and the frequent use of interdependent tactile-hearing empirical language structure in these environments. Finally, communication is a central variable for school inclusion of visually impaired students. The creation of appropriate communication contexts has the potential to include such students in the intrinsic teaching/learning processes. Without appropriate communication contexts, students with visual impairments will be in a condition of exclusion within the classroom. By setting up a suitable communication environment, these students will have the basic structural conditions for the effective participation in teaching/learning processes of electromagnetism. REFERENCES Bardin, L 1977 Anlise de Contedo. Lisboa: Edies 70. Baughman, J and Zollman, D 1977 Physics lab for the blind. The Physics Teacher, 15, 339-342. Beck-Winchatz, B and Ostro, S J 2003 Using Asteroid Scale Models in Space Science Education for Blind and Visually Impaired Students. The Astronomy Education Review, 2(2), 118-126. Camargo, E P, Scalvi L V A and Braga, T M B 2007 Concepciones alternativas sobre reposo y movimiento, modelos histricos y deficiencia visual. Enseanza de las Ciencias, 25(2), 171-182. Davies, J M 1994 Bibliography of publications relating to the teaching of science to students with disabilities. Science Association for persons with disabilities. University of Northern Iowa. Cedar Falls Iowa.

422

Journal of Emerging Trends in Educational Research and Policy Studies (JETERAPS) 4(3):413-423 (ISSN:2141-6990) Gardner, J A 1996 Tactile Graphics: an overview and resource guide. Science Access Project, Department of Physics, Oregon State University. Information Technology and Disabilities e-journal, 3 (4). Geraldi, J W 1998 Recuperando as prticas de interlocuo na sala de aula (Entrevista). Presena Pedaggica, Belo Horizonte , Minas Gerais, 4 (24), 519. Grady, C A et al. 2002 Accessible Universe: Making Astronomy Accessible to All in the Regular Elementary Classroom. The Astronomy Education Review, 2 (2), 1-19. Henderson, D R 1965 Laboratory Methods in Physics for the blind. University of Pittsburgh, Graduate Faculty in the Division of the Natural Sciences. Jossem, E L 2000 Resource Letter EPGA-1: The education of physics graduate assistants. American Journal of Physics, 68 (6), 502-512. Kucera, T J 1996. Teaching chemistry to students with disabilities. Information Technology and Disabilities Electronic Journal. Kumar, D D, Ramasamy, R and Stefanich, G P 2001 Science for Students with Visual Impairments: Teaching Suggestions and Policy Implications for Secondary Educators. Electronic Journal of Science Education, 5(3). Mortimer, E F and Scott, P H 2002 Atividade discursiva nas salas de aula de cincias: uma ferramenta sociocultural para analisar e planejar o ensino. Investigaes em Ensino de Cincias, Porto Alegre, Rio Grande do Sul, 7(3), 7-18. Padilla, K 2009 Visualization: Theory and practice in science education. International Journal of Science Education, 31(10), 1417-1420. Parry, M, Brazier, M and Fischbach, E 1997 Teaching college physics to a blind student. The Physics Teacher, 37, 400-404. Ramadas, J 2009 Visual and Spatial Modes in Science Learning. International Journal of Science Education, 31(3), 301 - 318. Rossing, T 1977 Comments on physics for the blind. The Physics Teacher, 15 (9), 565-565. Rule, A.C et al. 2010 Impact of Adaptive Materials on Teachers and their Students with Visual Impairments in Secondary Science and Mathematics Classes. International Journal of Science Education. DOI: 10.1080/09500693.2010.506619. Schleppenbach, D 1996 Teaching science to the visually impaired. Information Technology and Disabilities E-Journal. UNESCO 1994 The Salamanca statement and frameword for action on special needs education. Adopted by the World Conference on Special Needs Education Access and Quality, Salamanca, Spain, 710 June 1994. Genebra: UNESCO. Weems, B 1977 A physical science course for visually impaired. The Physics Teacher, 34, 333-338. Windelborn, A F 1999 Doing physics blind. The Physics Teacher, 37, 366-367.

423